The fair shake: Ubuntu vs. SUSE Linux
Posted by Daniel Stout on Wed 25 Oct 2006 at 8:06 PM
I hadn’t really given Ubuntu a fair shake the last time I looked at it. I decided to go another round with Ubuntu to see what it was all about. Ubuntu, as you may know, is a flavor of Linux, a free operating system with lots of open source applications. I specifically wanted to compare Ubuntu to SUSE Linux.
The initial act of downloading Ubuntu is easier than SUSE. You simply download a single CD image and burn that, whereas with SUSE you’ll download 5 or 6 disc images or a single, large DVD image. Instead of putting all the application packages on discs, Ubuntu offers you a menu from which you can download from.
One of the downsides of the Ubuntu installer became apparent with my desktop. It installed fine with my laptop, but it didn’t like my ATI video card in my desktop and switched to 640x480 resolution. This would be fine, except it wouldn’t allow any change of resolution. It was resolute in its resolution. I tried booting up and using safe video settings, which prompted the X Server to crap out and dump me into a text-based mode.
I had run through the installer once on my laptop, so I knew which prompts to hit. Even though 640x480 was not enough real estate to display the installer’s screens, I was able to successfully install it on my desktop. It was only after I installed the proprietary ATI driver that Ubuntu would allow a resolution besides 640x480. So okay, my initial impressions weren’t great. It’s nice to have only one CD to download for the installer, but it’s also nice to have something that actually works with garden variety hardware.
My other initial impression is that Ubuntu is not as polished as SUSE Linux. I kept both machines dual-boot with Windows. The GRUB boot-loader on Ubuntu has a simple text screen, whereas SUSE Linux has a graphical screen for selecting which OS to boot from. It’s a minor detail, but I think it’s indicative of the differences I found between Ubuntu and SUSE.
Ubuntu has rethought some of the concepts of Linux and Unix though. For example, user control is easier to maintain in Ubuntu. You don’t really need to worry about a separate root user or a root user password. In that sense it is similar to Mac OS X. The user’s password is enough to gain access to superuser capabilities such as installing system-wide packages or installing updates.
Initially, I liked the system for installing software on Ubuntu. It’s much simplified compared to SUSE. On the main application menu, you can select to add or remove programs. It will give you a list of available applications in a variety of categories that you can install.
If you’re familiar with Linux though, you’ll see that the list is a very short. You can click on boxes to list unsupported software and proprietary software. This is a more complete list, but somewhat unworkable in its quantity in the window as presented. Eventually, if you want more complete control of your Ubuntu system, you’ll end up in the “advanced” mode, which is equivalent to the regular SUSE software installer.
The other thing I noticed is that Ubuntu has a much smaller array of default packages installed on its base system than with a SUSE system. I ended up in the advanced installer because I was looking for some packages that I needed to do work. While the initial install of Ubuntu is smaller and easier, you’ll spend more time setting things up.
Ubuntu, once I had set it up, though was very appealing. With subpixel anti-aliasing turned on, the text was very crisp and nice. Nicer than SUSE I think. You’ll definitely want to install the MSFT core web fonts, which is a package in the unsupported category. Overall, Ubuntu had a sharper appearance. The difference was subtle, and maybe someone who doesn’t know about typography would even notice a difference. But to my eye it was significant.
I decided to give it a couple of weeks and see what I thought. And Ubuntu is a winner. I think for someone new to Linux that it’s a better choice than SUSE. The complexity of Linux is all there, but Ubuntu abstracts it up a layer. Ubuntu would be easier to manage for the neophyte.
Ubuntu is Linux of course. It’s built on open source foundations, but it feels like it’s been given a bit of evolution. It’s a shift in a new direction. Or perhaps, more accurately, it’s a response to Mac OS X, which has BSD at its core.
I liked Ubuntu a lot, and I think for a lot of people — especially those who are new to Linux — it would be an excellent choice. In the end though, I like the way SUSE Linux is organized. And for me, it doesn’t feel like I had kid gloves on when using it.
Of course, I want deeper penetration of Desktop Linux, and Ubuntu is definitely a step in the right direction. But I like using SUSE Linux because it doesn’t hide the complexity as much. SUSE has more of the feel of a power tool. And strange as though it is to hear me say that, I like that.
Tags: dapper drake · linux · suse · suse linux · ubuntu
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Validation: XHTML 1.0 Strict • CSS 2.1 • Atom 1.0
manufactured environments
This is a blog about technology, music, vinyl, turntables and more.
Blog Feed: 
Archives: 2000 to 2008
About: Daniel Stout
• Classic Entries
• The Tag Cloud
• Contact
my other blogs
Manufactured Fotos is a collection of my photography.
Manufactured Podcasts is a podcast featuring poetry and PDFcasts.
monthly archives
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- July 2003
- June 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
- March 2003
- February 2003
- January 2003
- July 2002
- May 2002
- April 2002
- March 2002
- February 2002
- January 2002
- December 2001
- November 2001
- September 2001
- August 2001
- July 2000
- June 2000
- May 2000
- April 2000
- March 2000
- February 2000
Same here. SUSE has been a long time favourite of mine. I'd say my top distros as of today, apart from my primary distro -SUSE, are MEPIS 2006 and Kubuntu.
One thing I would love to see in SUSE is the real simplicity of installing applications, as it is in *buntu world, though as I am mature user with SUSE, I do not face probs with this issue, but for new comers it will be a powerful argument.
Neat mini comparison :)
Hi,
everbody has their own preferences...
The last rpm based distro I tried - Mandrake 7 - sucked, so I sticked to apt/dpkg based distributions since then.
But maybe I should give the rpm based ones another try...
Moritz
Nice review. Have been a SuSE user for the last 4 years, but have decided to give Ubuntu a shot because of all the problems with the 10.1 release. However, As I am a KDE user, I tried Kubuntu, but found it to be less polished than SuSE. Apt-get is great - but sometimes Yast is a much better tool. For now, will give Ubuntu & GNOME a try - but if 10.2 is good, will be back on SuSE!
E@zyVG: Thanks for the comment. Last year, I set about to find a good Linux distribution, and I tried several. Ultimately, SUSE Linux was the one I kept. It's offers the best combination of features in my opinion, and there's a lot of support out there for it. Even after trying Ubuntu, I'm still convinced that SUSE Linux is the way to go.
Moritz: Apt/dpkg is definitely one way to go. From what I've heard, apt/dpkg is better than rpm, but I tend to find the GUI tools for managing rpms pretty intuitive. SUSE Linux 10.1 is a great distribution, and I highly recommend it.
Avinash: SUSE 10.2 is already in beta and looking for a December release. That said, you might check out the newly released 10.1 "Remastered" version that fixes the problems with the updating system.
Thanks.
just turned on to lenux from mac os x. this article was balanced and offered a lot of the info I need to go to the next step.
I've tried running (k)ubuntu many times and always return to suse. It's a clear winner when it comes to kde.
The 10.1 package management problems were actually... good since they made me look at Smart package management. Now suse 10.2 is out and has more or less fixed them, but i will stick to Smart, thank you.
(btw, nothing can keep up with apt's speed but that's not enough of a reason to use debian / ubuntu / etc)
HI!
I am newbie in Linux and the first distro I gave a try was Kubuntu 6.10 - I was really dissapointed and confused about all that positive buzz around that quite unpolished, buggy piece of softwear. I have red that it is better that Windows XP. Far from it. Then I tried Ubuntu which seemed a little bit better case but still dissapointing. As a result I almost lost any trust in linux and the I decided to give openSuSe a try. And I must admit that his is far more polished and reliable OS than Ubuntu (well, a admit that there are some points where Ubuntu is better - pacjage managment, speed, font rendering and so on). I have taken a look to some other Distros and still cannot grasp the reasons why Ubuntu is so popular when there are such really good and polished choizes as SuSE and Deamlinux for example.
hy all.
i'v been using both win and suse(starting 9.3) for a long time. recently a had a spear pc and installed a few distros.was very interested in *ubuntu, as every one is talking about it. and to my surprise ubuntu is worse than win. its too simple. maybe it is good if u just surf the internet and write docs. but if u want more, suse is the winner. ubuntu would be great for transaction from windows to linux. but after a while u get bored and want something better. SUSE is my #1.
Imagine this...
- 46 months
- 3 minute UPS (failing most of the time)
- main DB server
- restarts 27 times since first booted (due to power outage)
- never did a manual "fsck -y"
- still up and running till today with no quirks, sluggishness, errors, and powers up on its own right after an outage
Just like what a "true appliance" should do!
OpenSUSE > for mission-critical DB work
Astaro 6.0 > for super-tough "active firewalling and monitoring"
The best combination of Linux distributions I've ever seen yet! All that and I was born under the Church of Microsoft. Hehe.
Hello folks!
I was using Ubuntu during the Drapper Drake era (6.06) having a dual boot with OSX. I found myself booting into Ubuntu 90% of the time (the other 10% I was in OSX using i-Tunes to update my i-Pod).My Mac took a dive on me and I since have inherited an old G3 Blue n White tower.Well,it's an older machine with not much power so I stuck with only OSX.
Recently a friend of mine gave me a Dell Inspiron 1100.I tried to install the latest Ubunto (7.10) but had no success due to "No Linux kernel detected". I tried a 6.07 disc and got "Setting Deamon not loading" warnings. I tried the 6.06 disc and that booted fine.But I want a newer distro.I got a disc with the last issue of Linux Format that had the latest Open Suse and am considering an install on the Dell.This post has proven very helpfull.My question is this: Are there any knon issues with installing the latest Suse on this type of laptop? I would like a dual boot system untill I get completly used to Suse and then I will more than likely dedicate the Dell to Linux (I hate Windows anyway!). Any input would be greatly appreciated.
Thanx!
Juan